Should the Senate have a liasion or some other systematic interfacewith the Board of Regents, as does the student body? Pres. Supple saidthat he was in favor of constituents having a voice, but there are also thestaff, the alumni, etc. He would favor something that did not requireindividuals to attend all Regents meetings around the State all the time. (1) The logistics for all schools to do this would be a problemand usually the topics would not be of interest. Regents meetings tend toconcentrate on contractual types of questions, rather than curriculumquestions--about which they assume the various schools know best their ownneeds. A current contractual hot-topic may be HUBs (HistoricallyUnderutilized Businesses) with which State schools are supposed tocontract. Targets have been set for this and SWT has done about the bestof State schools until this year. Minority contractors picked up materialsfrom the University, but then did not place bids for some reason. Perhapsit was the size of the job or the number of bureaucratic requirements, e.g.bonding, paperwork, etc. (1) Appropriate representatives, however, might attend when theRegents meet on our campus, as they will next May, or when something reallyat issue arises concerning our particular campus, such as the student feeincrease which was specifically SWT's topic at the last meeting. (2) Alternatively, at each meeting the Presidents have to give areport and some of this could contain positions put forth by the Senate.Pres. Supple noted that the required Presidents' reports have not beenstimulating and that he once proposed that they be abandoned in favor ofpresentations on problems facing all campuses, e.g. student health andsafety issues (AIDS, assault, etc.). This proposal did not engenderenthusiasm with the Board, he said.

SENIOR FACULTY SYSTEMS

Departmental decisions became more democratic in the 1960s when thesenior faculty were included, as opposed to previous practice of chairsmaking all decisions. Since then decision making at this level has beenfrozen in time with regard to policy, but not in practice. It appears thatmost departments now include all faculty in discussions, but not in votingon personnel issues. The Senate has sent a draft proposal from the FacultyGovernance Committee (Don Hazelwood, Chair) to all departments forcomments. In essence, all faculty (as defined in the Faculty Handbook)should participate in all decisions, except personnel. This should returnto the Senate agenda in two or three weeks.

Pres. Supple supported inclusiveness as a way of making new facultyfeel welcome, informing them quickly on what was going on, and allowingthem to bring in new ideas. It is also the right thing to do.

DEVELOPMENTAL LEAVE APPLICATION FORM

CAD (Council of Academic Deans) will be responding to the draftform which spells out a little more on how to present proposals, especiallyin the area of methodology. Pres. Supple noted that we have too fewdevelopmental leave proposals, and perhaps they are not bold enough.

A discussion ensued regarding the lack of subsequent reports onwhat people actually did on leave and that we need supporting data tosubstantiate requests for more support in this area. Reports ofaccomplishment are to be collected in the VPAA's office.

FACULTY AMENITIES

Chair Swinney pointed out that the voluntary modified employment(VME--partial retirement) program says that they have "all facultyamenities." So what are faculty amenities for active and partially retiredfaculty? The Staff Council has been working on this for staff. The Senatewould like to come up with at least two lists, i.e. what we have and whatwe would like to have (with input from what others in the 50 states have).

Among the topics brought up were: (1) Free tuition for facultyand staff (not currently possible under TX law, but available in some otherstates and some private schools around the nation). Can this be examined?;(2) Discounted tickets, e.g. when we dropped the "blanket tax" ticket toall events, ticket sales for artistic and sports events declined ingeneral; (3) Day care--the Child Development Center is not a day carecenter, but a teaching and research center constrained by an ethnic andsocioeconomic class mix necessitated for grant funding; (4) We need inputon elder-care for faculty and staff.

On child and elder care, Pres. Supple proposed that we could atleast set up an information/referral system that informed staff and facultyon what was available locally. He also mentioned that in some communitiesuniversities were setting up day-care centers with the help of suchagencies as the YWCA, which supply providers in University facilities.

On elder care and retirement opportunities, the University couldsponsor workshops/seminars.

Regarding blanket tax and subsequent declines in attendance,perhaps we need to examine policy. One senator pointed out that inaddition we need to look at the forbidance (in 1980s?) of groups being ableto buy season tickets together in the same good sections to view sports,etc. When this camaraderie was cut off, they quit attending.

AQUARENA

The Regents will probably let SWT continue to run Aquarena untilAugust 31, 1996, at which time we hope to have an alternative. Presently,the situation with the IRS is still up in the air. We are trying to get arelease to convert from tax-free to taxable bonds (under which we can makea for-profit contract with a concessionaire) instead of waiting out thefive year hold on such a change. We still hope to get a ruling in three tofive months from the IRS--don't hold your breath. Also we must stillnegotiate details with bidders for the concession.

ADMISSIONS STANDARDS

According to the administration, SWT's academic standards forathletes are possibly the highest in the conference, under NCAA qualifyingguidelines. Even so, we have some athletes who would not meet normalrequirements. These students have been given assistance and have, asgroups, reached acceptable norms--with the exception of men's and women'sbasketball. The respective coaches are aware of this and are working onthe situation. Under Coach Jerry Clayton and others (who work closely withtheir students) we have done very well in our record of graduating ourathletes. As long as student academic performance rates are good andrising, the University will be pleased. Obviously basketball is an area tobe watched currently.

FISH HATCHERY

Judge Bunton has extended the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serviceresponsibility for the Hatchery to February 23. SWT has sent a letter tothe Service that we will accept the "refugio" responsibility (to garnersome specimens of endangered species if they are threatened by drought,etc.)--if the Service will fund the $54,000 a year that keeping specialistson watch will entail. No funds from SWT's existing budget are required.

13 DEVELOPMENTAL LEAVES (Policy and Forms)

RTA'd.

73 B.S. IN RADIATION THERAPY (Dean Juarez)

The Curriculum Committee has received no objections to the currentproposal within the five-day limit and they are expected to approve it.The Council of Academic Deans and the University Council will be examiningthe documentation on Tuesday of next week.

Dean Juarez pointed out that when he arrived in 1994 this proposalwas already in the discussion stage. (1) Shivers Cancer Center (which issoon to be incorporated into the merger of Seton and BrackenridgeHospitals) wants a batchelors degree for their radiation therapists. AB.S. will be an accrediation requirement by the year 2000 and the medicalgroup also wants well-rounded graduates immediately, if not sooner. Anexpansion into chemotherapy is also anticipated, as cancer is a growingproblem within Texas and the nation--given the aging of the population,and who knows what else. (2) This action should be taken before theFebruary Regents meeting to set the process in motion to get under theaccreditation umbrella which Shivers has, before it runs out in 1997.After that, it is a major pain and cost to gain this. In addition, thecurrent cohort in Shivers' certification program is ready to go into ourundergrad requirement program to finish a B.S. and Shivers' faculty arecurrently enthusiastic. In other words, Dr. Juarez pointed out, we havepeople who are enthusiastic now and want to push forward. Lags inimplementing the degree might dampen this, in addition to the accreditationproblems.

A number of questions arose regarding how many positions SWT wasresponsible for and contractual relations with for-profit corporation(s)who had not yet worked out their own structure (the merger of Shivers,Seton, and Brackenridge). We have been dealing basically with Shivers, sowhat will its eventual parent organization want? Prof. Swinney presented abalance sheet he had worked out which did not quite "jell" with the budgetin the proposal. Others pointed out that, in balance, how can theUniversity sign onto something when the details are so fuzzy. What wouldsuch small classes (limited by accreditation requirements regarding numberof students per high-tech equipment available) do to the recent commandthat SWT go to large numbers of student hours per faculty? Ergo, will therest of the University departments have to pick up the slack on SCH perfaculty if special programs (not just this one) have to have small classesto meet accreditation standards? [This argument seems deja vu but theSenate has not received any assurances on adjustments for special casesyet, e.g. intern classes and labs. All we have heard is that SCH indepartments and faculty to student ratios are across the board.]

On the other side, Dean Juarez pointed out that to be on thecutting edge required working with the corporate community in healthprofessions. Shivers has the equipment we could use for free and has thefaculty on board, whom we would hire as adjuncts. We would supply theother degree courses for the B.S. students (a boost to SCH) and would pickup administrator and adjunct faculty costs (and M&O?). Debate ensued onwho was gaining what at who's expense. On the positive side, this wouldalso be the only B.S. program of its kind in the State and would draw,perhaps, from a wide area. Also, it would open internship opportunitiesfor other Health Professions interns around the area. Employmentopportunities state-wide and elsewhere are quite good for radiationtherapists in cancer centers.

Cost-wise the bottom line, according to the proposal, says that theprogram would be paying for itself in the second year due to student fees,etc. State formula funding kicks in during the third year. Budgets fornew programs must be funded by internal or other sources for two yearsbefore ostensible State dollars are spent, although (in some way yourSecretary didn't quite grasp) we will benefit from the State and come outahead in the second year according to the proposal's projections.

Ultimately, the Senate could not vote "aye" on a proposal withbudget and contractual agreements rather vague and voted to RTA for moreinformation. Although a vote was not taken, there might have been somegeneral agreement that this was a good idea if more data were available atthe upcoming CAD and UC meetings.